As a general rule I don’t usually repost much of David’s stuff for no other reason than 99% of you will already have visited his site. However, I couldn’t ignore his observation (Printed below) on an article printed in the Huffington Post.
David, quite rightly questions the use of asterisk’s as a replacement for letters in an article or news report. The asterisk will inevitably be used in an effort to censor a swear word. The dictionary definition of an asterisk is: the symbol * which is used to refer readers to a note at the bottom of a page of text, or to show that a letter is missing from a word.
I won’t repeat what David has said about using Asterisks, that would just be f***ing stupid. However, I will add that someone once said to me that using swear words shows a person up as having a limited vocabulary – what a thick C*** that person was. I know that the range of my vocabulary may not stretch as far as that of a professor of Literature’s would, but I am willing to bet that my vocabulary range is well above the average persons.
At the end of the day, words like ‘fuck’, ‘shit’ and ‘bollocks’ are just that; words… Words in common use at that. The use of profanity is an easy, simple to understand, instantly recognisable way to emphasise either a point, your mood or the contempt you feel for something or someone.
You certainly have to question the mind set of someone who is reading about a serious injustice or mass genocide, yet only objects to the use of any bad language included in the text. To my mind those idiots are nothing more than Minced oath, secretions of the sebaceous gland, pate’s.
Saturday, 26 January 2013 11:28
This is a report at the Huffington Post and you see this all the time in newspapers worldwide:
‘Sir Bradley Wiggins has belatedly unleashed anger at his former idol Lance Armstrong, labelling the cycling cheat a “lying b*****d”.’
Now, what do you think he said? Lying so and so? Lying possum? Lying low? Lying in?
Well, being an adult with a modicum or even smear of intelligence and going so far as counting the * thingies between the b and d, it is my assessment after contemplating for, oh, the best part of 0.5 seconds, that Wiggins has called Armstrong a ‘lying BASTARD’.
So what’s with the b*****d?
I’ll tell you. It is the fake, fraudulent, hypocritical and self-deceiving morality that puts asterisks in words like b*****d and f**k while happily supporting wars that leave human beings, often children, with limbs and flesh scattered all across the street.
That’s fine. It’s ‘fighting terrorism’. That’s a moral and just war, isn’t it? But quoting someone saying bastard or fuck has to be symbolically covered over, for symbolic is all it is, to preserve the illusion of fake nose-in-the-air morality. Newsrooms in which fuck, bastard and more are the common language must protect the mystique of morality by throwing in a few ******s.
You see it’s okay in this self-deceiving ‘moral code’ to think bastard and fuck because what else goes through anyone’s mind when they see b*****d and f**k except bastard and fuck?
But so long as you don’t read bastard and fuck in full the moral high-ground is retained. They are, after all, ‘responsible and principled’ publications.
It is hilarious and pathetic and the moral version, in its own way, of saying that you are pepper-bombing cities of civilians to protect the lives of civilians.
We have a rather different moral code at Davidicke.com.
I find war, killing and violence grotesque and immoral and the programmed sensibilities of language rather less of a priority.
Call a b*****d a bastard and a f**k a fuck, I say. There, did anybody die, lose a limb or see their children blown to pieces?